SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9439

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
ABDUL RAFEEQUE.A.V – Appellant
Versus
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 5275 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
For the Respondents: SRI. GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA, SC

The court emphasized the borrowers' right to representation in loan settlements while ensuring compliance with procedural mandates under the SARFAESI Act.

Headnote:The petitioner borrowers availed loans from the respondent bank and defaulted in payments, leading to SARFAESI Act proceedings. The court directed the bank to consider the borrowers' representation for a One Time Settlement, highlighting their prior payment of Rs.10,00,000. Key issues were the borrowers' ability to settle the loan. The final ruling instructs the bank to process the representation within two weeks, deferring any adverse actions in the interim.

Table of Content
1. borrowers defaulted on loans leading to sarfaesi proceedings. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioners seek consideration for one time settlement. (Para 3)
3. court directs the bank to process the representation promptly. (Para 4)

BASANT BALAJI J ======================

W.P. (C) No. 5275 of 2026 ========================

Dated 11th day of February 2026 JUDGMENT The petitioners had availed a loan of Rs.15,00,000/- and Rs.33,00,000/- from the respondent Bank, being an overdraft facility and an agricultural loan respectively. Upon default in remitting the EMIs, the respondent Bank initiated proceedings under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act by issuing notice under Section 13(2) thereof. At that stage, the petitioners approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.2735 of 2024 seeking the benefit of instalment facility. By Ext.P1 judgment, this Court directed the petitioners to remit the outstanding amount of Rs.76,05,497/- in twelve consecutive and equal monthly instalments, commencing from 13.03.2024. As the petitioners failed to comply with the directions contained in Ext.P1 judgment, they filed I.A. No.2 of 2024 seeking enlargement of time, which came to be dismissed.

2. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal by filing S.A. No.521 of 2024 and S.A. No.522 of 2024, which are still pending consideration. In the meanwhile, the petitioners were served with Ext.P5 notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act . On receipt of the same, the petitioners submitted Ext.P6 representation before the respondent Bank seeking One Time Settlement and also remitted a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, evidenced by Ext.P7 as well as Ext.P7(a).

3. The limited relief sought in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondent Bank to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 representation, taking note of the remittance covered by Ext.P7.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondent Bank, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent Bank to take up Ext.P6 representation and, taking note of the deposit made as evidenced by Ext.P7, consider and dispose of the same within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Till the consideration and disposal of the application for One Time Settlement, the respondent Bank shall defer publication of the notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act in the newspapers.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top